It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Right To Life Historic Measure (that includes protection of every person from the time of fertilizat

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Ok, since no one else wants to call the reverand for what he is, I guess I will. He is a troll, nothing more. He saw a site dedicated to everything ATS is dedicated to, probably lurked for a day or so, biding his time, and then struck. Good for him, he caught everyone off guard. Unfortunately he doesn't play the part of the concerned reverand very well, like he professes. More akin to the crazy eyed preists looking at Galaleo back in the day and hating him for proving them wrong.

Edit: Spelling and grammar(probably more than I caught, but it's early)

[edit on 31-5-2008 by Finn1916]




posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Rough time frame wise for anyone who knows, What the earliest a baby can be removed from a mother and survive completely independently without being hooked up to machines, simply removed and nursed back to health by its own independent functions?



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Nighthawk

You're suggesting a conspiracy by the nations of this planet to reduce the female population through abortion. Do you have proof to back up this claim? Especially the part about most abortions being of female fetuses?


Yes, I am. The fellas at the top believe our population needs to be curtailed and since they view us as their swarming masses of mindless slaves, no better than cows or sheep (thanks Darwin), what better way to stem the flow of the population than by removing the heifers.

Check out "Female Infanticide"
www.gendercide.org...



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   


Actualy, yes, it is absolutely wrong to impose your personal beliefe structure on everyone else.


also there is a absolute right to freedom but it is wayed against every one elses rights.

I bet you will not say its absolutely wrong for me to impose my beliefes if I impose them on a serial killer by putting him in jail.

My belief that murdering innocents is wrong out weighs his freedom. Both are absolute standards and we use our judgment.

ON TOPIC: Everyone agrees absolutely that killing innocent children is absolutely wrong in all circumstances.

The only reason you find abortion OK is that you do not consider them humans. If they were 1 year old you would call the police. But no you say they are not human WHY - you believe a few scientists - That's what the 2 science guys here posted like chickens and turtles



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:35 AM
link   
Actually, I am not pro abortion at all, but as a man I believe that it is not my right to make that decision. And the law states that a murderer be put in prison. That is different than a personal religious or political belief. When the serial killer took a person's life, he forfeited his rights as he knew he would.




..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 31-5-2008 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
also there is a absolute right to freedom but it is wayed against every one elses rights.

I bet you will not say its absolutely wrong for me to impose my beliefes if I impose them on a serial killer by putting him in jail.


This is a bait-and-switch arguement. It's not even an appropriate analogy. You can't compare apples to oranges, it's not the same thing.

This is about autonomy. Your personal belief system should not be given more creedence than my right to control my own body.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Check this out:




Infanticide is a crime overwhelmingly committed by women, both in the Third and First Worlds. (This contrasts markedly with "infanticide in nonhuman primates," which "is carried out primarily by migrant males who are unrelated to the infant or its parents and is a manifestation of reproductive competition among males." [Glenn Hausfater, "Infanticide: Comparative and Evolutionary Perspectives," Current Anthropology, 25: 4 (1984), p. 501.]


www.gendercide.org...



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   
In the case of China you indeed have a point, but in India it is more of a cultural issue tied to archaic social practices than a "conspiracy" of government to actively reduce populations through abortion. Most of the site and its numbers seems dedicated to infanticide rather than abortion, gender-specific or not. You may not separate the two but I certainly do.

Also, you're comparing apples and oranges: Culturally repressed, less-than-modern societies such as China and India have little to do with a woman's right to choose in America. Here, there is NO conspiracy, just people who don't want children being beset by those who want them to have those kids at all cost. Here, it is a matter of individual choice rather than an attempt at social engineering (as in China) or a matter of protecting a family's economic and social standing in the caste system (as in India).

My question stands. Is there proof of a concerted effort within the US Government to engineer our population through the selective abortion of female fetuses?



..............................................................................
[edit: removed unnecessary quote of entire previous post]
Quoting - Please review this link

[edit on 31-5-2008 by 12m8keall2c]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   
You have no right to life people. You evolved form slime and until you contribute to this world, you are worth nothing more than the slime you came from. Please get over yourself your an big brained ape ~ there is nothing sacred~thats a fairytale. Fetus's are worthless until they are trained by their parents.

Scientists can evolve mankind an engineer a better world through science and reason. Please consider my great hope for manknd:



Future Generations is about humanitarian eugenics.
Humanitarian eugenics strives to leave a genuine legacy
of love to future generations: good health, high intelligence,
and noble character. We advocate measures to improve the innate
quality of humankind which are entirely voluntary. Please be forewarned
that most ideas expressed on this website are "politically incorrect." We aspire
to total honesty, believing that it is the only policy for people with integrity,
and furthermore, that in the long run, honesty is far-and-away the most compassionate
policy. If we ever hope to solve the problems which face our species, it's imperative
that we first look at them objectively, and assess the scientific evidence without
bias. If the truth about genetics and behavior, about eugenics, or about
race, is considered "taboo," and falsehoods are the only socially
acceptable opinions, then this is truly a sad state of affairs,
but we won't let it deter us.
www.eugenics.net...



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   


Culturally repressed, less-than-modern societies such as China


Oh china is not culturally-repressed. And they aren't alone in this. It's happening everywhere abortion is encouraged. The statistics for the USA are better for females, being about 51 boys to 49 girl babies who survive the decision process on whether to abort or not. But in most places in the world, females are so low in social value, that most female fetuses don't survive.
Many, as is indicated in the article, are killed after they are born, for the same reasons. China, one of the most populated countries on the planet, that represents the biggest chunk of humanity, will, in the next generation, be nearly devoid of females of any kind. If I understand these figures correctly, since 1979 they have aborted and/or infanticided enough females to be equivalent to the entire female population of the USA.

Here's a memorial I painted for their lost females




Click link below to see full image
thestargates.com...





[edit on 31-5-2008 by undo]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   
Thanks Rev.!
This is a subject MANY here an ATS don't want to even think about.
When I worked at a crisis pregnancy center. For those women who had unwanted pregnancies and weren't just going to kill them, our primary donations came from churches. Most others didn't give a rat's what happened to these girls!

If women are saved from having to make a 'choice' to kill their children and put them up for adoption, or keep them, the mental trauma will be curtailed and they can actually GROW from it.
Abortion actually helps child molesters to get rid of the evidence with a few hours of out-patient time and about 400 dollars.

I have heard of Satanic, Evil doctors performing some of these procedures!
Child sacrifice, unknown to the 'mother.'
As someone who had an abortion and wasn't a Christian at about 14 weeks, it nearly destroyed my mind.
I was very suicidal and was so until I became a Christian and Jesus forgave me 15 years ago.


[edit on 31-5-2008 by Clearskies]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:22 PM
link   
In my opinion this ruling will have a negative effect instead of a positive one. While I am against abortion, they do have their place and I think the twenty four [24] week limit is a agreeable time frame.

My reasoning is the fact that if we get rid of abortions, we will see a huge increase in the amount of "dumpster babies" in the world. If someone doesnt want a child, they are going to get rid of it one way or another. I would much rather have a medically assisted first trimester abortion then to see thousands of babies dying violent deaths at the hands of their mothers after being born. Women would be more inclined deliver the child at home, which is also very dangerous to the mother, so they can rid themselves of the child without anyone knowing.

Would you rather have babies being drowned, starved, beaten, suffocated, and so on after birth? Instead of a medically assisted procedure?

I also am for pre-natal screening of such disorders as downs syndrome, genetic diseases, autism and neural tube defects. These are conditions that require an absurd amount of resources to care for such individuals as well as the fact that many of them will never be able to function on their own. These are disorders that in my eyes go against natures way of keeping defective genes out of the human population.

Now before anyone has a cow with my previous statement - I was born with a neural tube defect called Spina bifida cystica (myelomeningocele). I was never supposed to be normal - the chances of even being able to use a wheelchair were slim to none, let alone walking, running. and mixed martial arts fighting. While I did turn out to be a miracle, the chanes were basically nonexistant that I would even be remotely normal. I would never want to put that burden on my parents and would have had no problem if such testing was available and they decided to opt for an abortion. Its not fair to force parents to knowingly have a child that will never be normal. My uncle has downs syndrome and I would never want to make my child grow up like that.

So in conclusion, abortion is a necessary evil. Without it, infantcide would only be more violent, as well as putting more mothers at risk due to them opting for at home deliveries in the secrecy of their house. Also, abortion is understood if the child will be known to never live a normal life, care for itself, and so on. As sad as it is, in this current age I do think that it is something that we cannot get rid of without fear of many worse actions being the result of its removal.

Edit: Just wanted to add, I do NOT support the use of abortion as birth control and the ladies who are having three, four, five plus abortions should be classified and put on trial for capital murder.

[edit on 31-5-2008 by deadline527]



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo


Click link below to see full image
thestargates.com...
[edit on 31-5-2008 by undo]



Absolutely Gorgeous!
I love your work and your dear heart!



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Reverend SamuelTophatJack
 


So now we women should allowed the male of the species to pursue their goal of controlling women reproductive parts and treat them as if they were not part of the woman body but the property of the church and the state.



Whoa!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and I thought we are in the 21 first century.


Incredible.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How about castrating every male so woman don't have to go through abortions of unwanted pregnancies.


After all we have enough sperm Banks to populate the earth over and over again, who needs men!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sarcasm intended.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   


s well as the fact that many of them will never be able to function on their own


We cared for my elderly mother, who had developed advanced alzheimers. She couldn't do much of anything for herself. It was actually a growing process for us, not a burden, although there were certainly some challenges. Like having to replace all our glass dishes with plastic because she tended to throw the glass/cup/plate, against the wall when she was done with it. hehe. We'd hear CRAAASH! And know immediately that mom was done eating.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by marg6043
 





How about castrating every male so woman don't have to go through abortions


I like this plan!
See, they don't do that though, instead, they force women to make these horrible decisions.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by undo


Culturally repressed, less-than-modern societies such as China


Oh china is not culturally-repressed.


I would disagree with this statement. Any culture that has political prisoners, and especially one that uses them as slaves for American-owned factories, is culturally repressed. The fact that American Internet companies like Yahoo! and Google agree to censor their content to favor the authoritarian regime in Beijing by definition is a repression of culture. If you cannot freely access information because the authorities deem it dangerous to their power base your culture is repressed.


And they aren't alone in this. It's happening everywhere abortion is encouraged.
(emphasis mine)

I don't know of any group in the US that actually actively encourages abortion. Most groups such as Planned Parenthood advocate better sexual education and the use of birth control to prevent unwanted pregnancy in the first place. Unfortunately such concepts are usually just as demonized as abortion by certain elements, primarily religious, who again want to regulate sexual activity in search of social stability. In doing so they actually exacerbate the problem of unwanted pregnancy and thus create their own problems to solve. Expecting abstinance-only programs to prevent unwanted pregnancy is foolhardy. It is natural for humans to seek sexual gratification and they will do so one way or another. To accept this as fact and provide the knowledge and tools to make it as safe as possible, and reduce the risk of unwanted pregnancy as much as possible, is the BEST way to solve the abortion "problem" in the United States.


The statistics for the USA are better for females, being about 51 boys to 49 girl babies who survive the decision process on whether to abort or not. But in most places in the world, females are so low in social value, that most female fetuses don't survive.
Many, as is indicated in the article, are killed after they are born, for the same reasons. China, one of the most populated countries on the planet, that represents the biggest chunk of humanity, will, in the next generation, be nearly devoid of females of any kind. If I understand these figures correctly, since 1979 they have aborted and/or infanticided enough females to be equivalent to the entire female population of the USA.


Then that is China's folly and they will eventually pay the price as their population reduces to a point where it can no longer sustain itself. Again, that has nothing to do with the right to choose in the US.

As for the low status of women the world over, this is a problem that has existed for a very long time and will probably never go away. Males, as the natural aggressors of most mammalian species, will always seek dominance in some form or another over females. That's not to say this is right--humans (presumably) have the intellectual capacity to overcome such urges--however, that same capacity is usually used for creating an abusive patriarchal culture to socially justify the natural tendency of males to seek dominance. And, sad as that is, there is not one blasted thing you or I can do about it; we have no right to determine for another culture how they will live their lives. We cannot change them and should not seek to.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:38 PM
link   


I would disagree with this statement. Any culture that has political prisoners, and especially one that uses them as slaves for American-owned factories, is culturally repressed. The fact that American Internet companies like Yahoo! and Google agree to censor their content to favor the authoritarian regime in Beijing by definition is a repression of culture.


Well now, I agree with you on this, but that's from our "democratic" perspective. Because they aren't democratic, doesn't mean they are repressed. It just means they aren't democratic. I agree that a republic democracy seems superior to communism, the problem basically boils down to cultural values. But, if you look at their society and its order, they are a well-oiled machine considering how many people they have. You should scan the Google Earth images of their cities and countryside. Not a technologically or civilly backward country by any stretch of the imagination. I think "politically repressive" is a better way of saying it. Culturally repressive gives the impression that they are living in the dark ages and that is definitely not the case.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Clearskies
I have heard of Satanic, Evil doctors performing some of these procedures!
Child sacrifice, unknown to the 'mother.'


This has been asserted before and again I ask, WHERE IS THE PROOF!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!

Something you "have heard of" is not confirmed fact. To make major social and cultural decisions impacting millions based on rumors that shadowy forces are using aborted fetuses for ritual sacrifice to a fictional god is so backwards it would be funny if the consequences weren't so tragic.



posted on May, 31 2008 @ 12:42 PM
link   
Like all things in life, making it illegal to have an abortion in the US will not stop people from having them done.

What would you rather have, women on kitchen tables with a coat hanger stuck inside them, or safe and legal abortions for those that feel they need them?

Often left out of the argument is the class issue this brings about. As the upper echelons of society can still fly or drive to Mexico or Canada to have an abortion, while those with little to no financial backing are forced to give birth.

I find it funny that most of the more staunch oppenents of abortion (Reagan comes to mind) supported safe and legal abortion for years until the Republican party realized they could split the Democratic vote over this issue. In my mind, it is the crassest case of political opportunism in US politics.

Pro-life? Ha, forced pregnancy is more like it!

The State has NO RIGHT to decide what a woman can or cannot do with her body.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join